HomeMy WebLinkAbout20250989 Rt 9 / South Broadway Special Use Permit Memo Review Traffic Related Comments 07.24.2026
MEMORANDUM
To: City of Saratoga Springs, Office of Engineering
Date: July 17, 2026
From: Dale T. (Skip) Francis, PE, Client Manager
Mark Nadolny, Traffic Reviewer
Mark Sargent, PE, Traffic Reviewer
RE: Proposed Rt 9 / South Broadway Special Use Permit – Technical Review #2
City PB# 20250989
CM Project: R250452.07, Task Order 07
Documents Received for Review
On June 17, 2026 and July 13, 2026, electronic copies of the following documents were made available to
Creighton Manning Engineering & Surveying, PLLC (CM) for review:
1. Updated Traffic Impact Study – Proposed Mixed Use Development, prepared by GTS Consulting, dated
6/8/26 (213 pages).
2. Supplemental Submission – Response to Board Comments, prepared by Cannie Law PLLC dated June
16, 2026 (6 pages).
3. Concept Plan (C-301), prepared by Bohler Engineering, dated 6/15/26 (1 page).
4. Emergency Vehicle Turn Plan (T-101), prepared by Bohler Engineering, dated 6/15/26 (1 page).
5. Site Layout and Materials Plan (for Saratoga Springs Homewood Suites), prepared by the LA Group,
dated 7/16/14 (1 page).
6. Site Master Plan (Traffic Signal and Traffic Circle Options), site plan originally prepared by Bohler
Engineering, dated 2/5/26. Concepts developed by Michael Tuller – Saratoga Springs Principal Planner
(2 pages).
Technical Review Comments
Based on our technical review of the Project documents available for review, we offer the following additional
technical comments for the City’s consideration during the municipal review process. Any previous items that
have been satisfactorily addressed by the Applicant’s Team have been removed from the numbering sequence
within this memo. Any remaining open/unresolved items retain their original number for consistency of
reference and include the Applicant’s responses shown in italics text. CM’s supplemental comments to
unresolved items are shown in bold text.
Updated Traffic Impact Study Report
Crash Analysis
11. The crash analysis that covers the March 2022 to February 2025 time period adequately summarizes
crashes on US Route 9. With that being said, it is noted that the “beer-to-go” opening of the Tree
House Brewery occurred in December 2024; however, the actual taproom did not open until March of
2025. This indicates that the crash assessment did not capture conditions when this neighboring
facility was fully operational. A new request of crashes should be made to summarize current
conditions. Has crash frequency increased on this section of US Route 9 since the opening of the Tree
House Brewery?
Memorandum – Technical Review #2
PB# 20250989 Proposed Rt 9 / South Broadway Special Use Permit
Page 2
GTS Consulting Response: A crash analysis was completed for US Route 9 between Crescent Avenue
and E West Road using history reports obtained for a four year period from May 2022 through May
2026.
CM Response: A review of the data indicates that the number of crashes generally did not change
after development of the Tree House Brewery as summarized in Table 1.
Table 1 – Crashes by Year
Year Total Crashes
May 2022-December 2022 (8 months) 9
January 2023-December 2023 (12 months) 6
January 2024-December 2024 (12 months) 8
Approximate Opening of Tree House Brewery --
January 2025-December 2025 (12 months) 8
January 2026-May 2026 (5 months) 3
12. Provide the detailed MV-104 reports for the crashes so that the severity and cause of these incidents
can be reviewed. It is noted that there was a fatality in the project corridor on September 30, 2025.
GTS Consulting Response: Overall, there were 30 property damage only crashes with 4 injury
crashes and 1 fatality crashes. The fatality crash occurred on September 30th, 2025 involving a
tractor trailer traveling southbound on US Route 9 striking at pickup truck that stopped on the
southbound shoulder of the roadway.
CM Response: The MV-104 reports were included in the updated letter. A review of the injury
related crashes indicates that two occurred when a southbound motorist failed to yield the right-
of-way to a northbound vehicle when turning into the Homewood Suites parking lot. The other
injury crash occurred at the E West Road traffic signal when a southbound motorist rear-ended
vehicles waiting at the traffic light due to alcohol involvement. The other injury crash noted in the
letter had nothing to do with the vehicle incident. The driver was taken to the hospital due to an
unrelated medical issue. The unfortunate fatal crash occurred when a truck driver failed to keep
left and struck a vehicle/driver who had stopped on the shoulder of US Route 9.
Trip Generation and Distribution
17. The trip distribution assumes that the majority of traffic (80%) will use the northern driveway;
however, the most recent site plan shows that the southern driveway provides access to
approximately 55% of the parking spaces and appears to be the main access into the site. The trip
distribution should be updated to reflect this. In addition, motorists generally do not pass the first
driveway they come to in order to access a development.
GTS Consulting Response: Based on existing traffic patterns and population centers in the area,
50% of the new trips generated are expected to travel to/from the south on US Route 9, 40% are
expected to travel to/from the north on US Route 9, and 10% are expected to travel to/from the
east on Crescent Avenue. The expected arrival/departure distribution is shown in Figure 3.
CM Response: There is a minor error on Figure 3 for the southbound through movement at the
southern site driveway. This did not impact future trip assignments or analysis.
Memorandum – Technical Review #2
PB# 20250989 Proposed Rt 9 / South Broadway Special Use Permit
Page 3
Build Operations
18. A discussion of intersection control is not provided for the proposed Site Driveway intersections on US
Route 9. The Synchro analysis indicates that these will operate under stop-sign control with a single
lane entering and exiting the site; however, the most recent plan shows separate left and right turn
lanes exiting the site and two entering lanes at the southern driveway. Provide the anticipated
geometry at these locations. Was a traffic signal warrant considered at the site driveway locations?
GTS Consulting Response: A signal warrant analysis was completed for the site driveway
intersections at US Route 9 to confirm that signals are not warranted at either location with the
proposed full build out of the proposed mixed use development.
The 2028 weekday morning and evening peak hour build traffic volumes for the approaches to both
intersections were extrapolated over a typical day from 6am to 7pm based on the typical variation
in hourly volumes on urban streets, developed by the Traffic Institute at Northwestern University.
The morning peak hour volumes were extrapolated from 6am to 12pm, and the evening peak hour
volumes were extrapolated from 12pm to 7pm. Both the typical variation in traffic graphic and
estimated hourly traffic volumes at each intersection have been attached.
A traffic signal is not warranted at either of the two proposed site driveways.
CM Response: A review of the daily traffic volumes developed at the site access intersections used
general hourly variations provided by The Traffic Institute at Northeastern University for an urban
road. Since US Route 9 and the proposed uses will generate traffic differently over the course of
a typical day, the hourly traffic volumes for the signal warrant should be revised based on the
following:
US Route 9 Through Volumes – Use hourly variation data that can be obtained from the
existing ATR on US Route 9.
Site Generated Trips – Use the “Time of Day Trip Distribution – Vehicle” data provided by ITE
in the Trip Generation Manual Appendix to develop hourly traffic assumptions associated with
entering/exiting traffic for each specific land use since apartments, hotels, and commercial
spaces generate trips differently over the course of a typical day.
A review of the warrant assessment indicates that operating speeds on US Route 9 were not
applied to the various volume thresholds. These should be updated since the thresholds are
reduced when mainline speeds exceed 40-mph.
It is noted that NYSDOT has not provided comments regarding access to the site. Section 5A.4.1.3
of the Highway Design Manual (HDM) – Chapter 5 Appendix 5A (POLICY and STANDARDS for the
Design of Entrances to State Highways) indicates that, “Normally only one driveway shall be
permitted for each residential property, minor commercial property, and subdivision. An
additional driveway may be permitted by the Department if both sufficient frontage exists, and
extenuating circumstances justify a second driveway.” Will a traffic signal be warranted if NYSDOT
eliminates one of the driveways or restricts access to one of the curb-cuts in order to minimize
conflict points on US Route 9?
The signal warrant assessment should be updated to reflect the revised traffic conditions, reduced
volume thresholds, and potential access modifications (one or two points of access).
Memorandum – Technical Review #2
PB# 20250989 Proposed Rt 9 / South Broadway Special Use Permit
Page 4
Attachments
21. It is unclear if the HV column (Heavy Vehicles) are in addition to the counts noted by movement since
they are added to get the total intersection volume. The “Heavy Vehicles” can be added to the peak
hour summary sheet by movement and should be provided to confirm that they do not need to be
added separately to each intersection movement.
GTS Consulting Response: Not answered.
CM Response: This comment was not specifically addressed. Please indicate if heavy vehicles are
included in the traffic volumes shown on the Figures.
22. Why is the Synchro Percentile Delay level of service reports used at the signalized intersections instead
of the HCM 7th edition reports?
GTS Consulting Response: Not answered.
CM Response: This comment was not specifically addressed. Please indicate why the HCM 7th
edition was not used.
23. The analysis for the unsignalized intersections should account for the two-way left-turn lane (TWLTL)
since motorists exiting the development can make a two-stage left-turn to travel south on US Route
9.
GTS Consulting Response: Not applied.
CM Response: This comment was not specifically addressed; however, it is noted that the
unsignalized intersections operate adequately even without the TWLTL which would improve
LOS conditions. This should be updated if the site driveway intersection analysis is updated to
address future comments.
Supplemental Submission – Response to Board Comments
31. A direct pedestrian connection from the hotel land use (south side of main access driveway) to the
multi-use path should be considered since guests will likely walk to neighboring land uses such as Tree
House Brewing, the Saratoga Spa State Park, and the Saratoga Performing Arts Center (SPAC).
Cannie Law Response: Confirmed. A direct connection of the multi-use path is proposed via the
walkway to the north of the southern driveway. Further pedestrian connection to the south is not
proposed to retain as much of the native vegetation in that area as possible. Additionally, it will
likely reduce the number of pedestrians crossing that driveway. Furthermore, although the UDO
requires continuation of the multi-use path over the entire frontage, the Applicant will be seeking
a waiver of this to the south of southern driveway, as locations further south of the site in the area
where such a path would run contain DEC wetlands and archeologically sensitive areas. The
Applicant wishes to avoid, and the UDO prevents, the construction within the wetlands. As such, a
waiver is warranted and can be further discussed with the Board during site plan review.
CM Response: The Planning Board should review the waiver request to not provide a multi-use
path along the entire frontage. It is noted that the updated site plan does show a multi-use path
along the frontage (including south of the southern driveway).
Memorandum – Technical Review #2
PB# 20250989 Proposed Rt 9 / South Broadway Special Use Permit
Page 5
34. A more direct internal pedestrian and /or vehicle connection from the Homewood Suites hotel should
be considered. The commercial space may become a destination for hotel guests since it can
accommodate eating and drinking establishments. The existing pedestrian connection on the
Homewood Suites hotel property directs guests to the north and it is reasonable to assume that
pedestrians will cut through the parking lots between the two uses.
Cannie Law Response: Noted. The Applicant will consider this connection with discussions with the
neighbor to the north to get their permission and report back to the Board during site plan review.
CM Response: The Applicant should inform the Planning Board if these connections are feasible.
37. Has lighting been considered at the site driveway intersections to improve driver visibility?
Cannie Law Response: This will be further reviewed, evaluated and discussed during site plan
review.
CM Response: Noted. The Applicant should continue discussion with the Planning Board.
39. Where will snow storage be accommodated?
Cannie Law Response: This will be reviewed in greater detail once we have a better understanding
of the concept plan meeting the approval of the Planning Board.
CM Response: Noted. The Applicant should continue discussion with the Planning Board.
NEW DOCUMENTS WITH ADDITIONAL REVIEW/COMMENTS
Concept Plan (C-301)
40. No new comments (see response to Comment #31).
Emergency Vehicle Turn Plan (T-101)
41. The plan indicates that an emergency vehicle can negotiate the turns to/from US Route 9 and within
the parking lots. No comments.
Site Layout and Materials Plan (for Saratoga Springs Homewood Suites)
42. A review of the site plan for Homewood Suites indicates that cross easements were included in the
approval of that project. These should be used to connect the two properties which will minimize
mainline conflicts.
Site Master Plan (Traffic Signal and Traffic Circle Options)
43. Traffic Signal Option:
a. A connection in the northeast quadrant of the property to the Tree House Brewery would allow
patrons of that development to access a potential traffic signal; however, this connection would
increase traffic through the parking areas for the site. In addition, a connection would eliminate
some parking spaces for the Tree House Brewery and it is unknown if patrons of that site may start
Memorandum – Technical Review #2
PB# 20250989 Proposed Rt 9 / South Broadway Special Use Permit
Page 6
to park on the South Broadway Mixed-Use Property or the Homewood Suites property as an
overflow option.
b. A vehicle/pedestrian connection provided in front of Homewood Suites between the proposed
development and the Tree House Brewery would minimize mainline conflicts by allowing internal
travel between these sites.
c. The northern driveway has been limited to a right-in/right-out only driveway on this concept. This
would minimize mainline conflict points and would force more site related traffic to the main site
driveway which would increase the chances that a traffic signal would be warranted.
d. The marked crosswalk across US Route 9 from the South Broadway Mixed-Use Property would not
connect directly to a sidewalk/mixed-use path on the west side of US Route 9. It is noted that a
break in an existing row of trees located within the Saratoga Spa State Park would need to be
created in order to access an internal multi-use path.
e. A traffic signal would likely reduce right-angle and left-turn crashes at the main site driveway.
f. This type of traffic control would improve access to/from the site; however, it would increase delay
to through traffic on US Route 9 for a private development.
g. If the multi-use path provided on the east side of US Route 9 is terminated at the southern
driveway due to wetland impacts located south of this property (as noted in the Supplemental
Submission), this might represent a logical pedestrian crossing location. Guests from the hotels,
residents of the apartments, and patrons of the brewery that are destined to locations in the
southwest quadrant of the Saratoga Spa State Park may not walk approximately ½-mile north to
the existing traffic signal provided at Cresent Avenue to cross US Route 9. If there is no intention
to bring the multi-use path to the signalized E. West Road intersection, a signalized pedestrian
crossing approximately halfway between these two intersections would be appropriate for
consideration.
h. It is noted that an exclusive pedestrian phase could be provided to increase pedestrian safety.
i. It is noted that the installation of a traffic signal would be based on NYSDOT review and approval.
44. Traffic Circle Option:
a. The comments made for 43.a through 43.e are the same for this concept.
b. A roundabout would introduce a calming element entering the City of Saratoga Springs. It is noted
that the speed limit on this section of US Route 9 would need to be reduced if a roundabout were
constructed at the main entrance to the site. It is noted that this would be a two-lane roundabout
due to the existing geometry on US Route 9.
c. A roundabout would be significantly more expensive to construct than the installation of a traffic
signal.
d. A roundabout would provide adequate traffic operations; however, delay would be spread to all
movements.
e. A roundabout would provide less protection to pedestrians since motorists would not be forced
to stop by a traffic signal.
Closing
Our recommendation to the Board is that the Applicant should respond to these additional comments which
should be resubmitted for a third review. With the Applicant’s next submission, we recommend that a cover
letter be provided to the City with the Applicant’s itemized responses.
Should you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact our office. End of Memorandum.